Kidney allografts are subjected to ischemia reperfusion injury during the process of transplantation. Hypothermic machine perfusion (HMP) of deceased donor kidneys from organ procurement until transplantation is associated with a superior outcome when compared to static cold storage (SCS). Nevertheless, cold ischemia time (CIT) remains an independent risk factor for delayed graft function (DGF) in HMP-preserved kidney allografts as well. We performed a retrospective single-center study including all adult recipients who underwent deceased donor kidney-only transplantation at our center between January 2019 and December 2020. Beside the clinicopathological donor and recipient data, flow and resistance data during HMP were assessed. Short- and long-term kidney allograft outcome after end-ischemic HMP and SCS were analyzed and compared. Organ preservation consisted of either SCS (n = 88) or HMP (n = 45). There were no differences in recipient demographics and donor details between groups. CIT was significantly longer in the HMP group (16.5 [8.5–28.5] vs. 11.3 [5.4–24.1], p < 0.0001). The incidence of DGF as well as serum creatinine at discharge and at 1 year post transplant were comparable between groups. Duration of SCS prior to HMP was comparable among grafts with and without DGF. Flow rate and organ resistance at the start of HMP were significantly worse in DGF-kidney grafts (arterial flow 22.50 [18.00–48.00] vs. 51.83 [25.50–92.67] ml/min, p = 0.0256; organ resistance 123.33 [57.67–165.50] vs. 51.33 [28.17–111.50] mmHg/mL/min, p = 0.0050). Recipients with DGF had significantly worse creatinine levels at discharge (2.54 [1.08–7.64] vs. 1.67 [0.90–6.56], p < 0.0001) and at 1 year post transplant (1.80 [1.09–7.95] vs. 1.59 [0.87–7.40], p = 0.0105). In conclusion, baseline HMP parameters could be applied as a predictive tool for initial graft function, which in turn determines long-term outcome.

Background: Novel robotic surgical techniques have substantially improved the safety and outcomes of Ivor Lewis esophagectomy, offering greater precision, reduced surgical trauma, and more radical lymphadenectomy compared to conventional approaches. While perioperative results are increasingly promising, the adoption of robotic technology appears to be accompanied by an emerging set of procedure-specific complications not previously encountered—or encountered with different frequency—in open surgery. Understanding this evolving complication profile is essential to fully realize the oncological potential of robotic esophagectomy. Methods: This retrospective single-center study compared 407 consecutive patients undergoing Ivor Lewis esophagectomy at a high-volume center (OPE n = 163; HRB n = 75; FRB n = 169; 2012–2023) regarding three pathophysiologically motivated primary endpoints within 12 months: paraconduit herniation, chylothorax, and neo-esophagus–airway fistula. Results: One-year survival was 71.8%, 74.7%, and 82.2% (p = 0.073). Chylothorax was significantly more frequent in FRB (12.4%) than in OPE (2.5%) or HRB (2.7%) (p < 0.001), with surgical approach as sole independent predictor. Lymphangiography in three FRB patients demonstrated thoracic duct integrity in all; leakage originated from the celiac lymphadenectomy field ascending transhiatally—suggesting a distinct mechanism potentially linked to surgical radicality. All cases resolved conservatively. Neo-esophagus–airway fistula occured significantly less frequently with robotic approaches (FRB 0.6% vs. OPE 4.9%; p = 0.031). Paraconduit herniation did not differ significantly within 12 months (p = 0.272). Conclusions: The complication profile of robotic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy reflects its oncological ambition: elevated chylothorax rates may correlate with radical lymphadenectomy and represent an acceptable trade-off within a multimodal treatment strategy. Fistula risk is meaningfully reduced. These findings support robotic esophagectomy as a safe and effective approach in experienced centers.